• HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    IIRC, birthright citizenship isn’t quite as cut and dried as it seems. My ex-spouse worked in a passport office, and there are some weird rules about things like how many years you have to have lived in the US depending on exactly where you were born and to which parents. I don’t remember all of them, but it’s not quite as cut-and-dried as “you’re a US citizen if you were born in the US”; you also have to be subject to US jurisdiction. So if you’re born in the US, but are raised entirely outside of the US, IIRC you might not be a citizen.

    • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Everyone born on US soil is, by law, a US citizen. If you are within US territory, you are subject to US jurisdiction. That’s how jurisdiction works in every country on earth. The 14th Amendment does not carve out exceptions. You can be born here, and raised elsewhere, and still a US citizen. You remember wrong, and it is as cut and dried as it seems.

    • DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Wow why would you so confidently lie about this?

      Why pretend like our rights don’t exist?

      Is there some kind of consent you are trying to manufacture?

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The exact terms of birthright citizenship are laid out in the 8 U.S.C. § 1401; the way that this is interpreted is up to courts.

        According to US statute, if Barack Obama had been born outside of the US (he was born in Hawai’i) to his American mother while she was not married to his Kenyan father (…and they were married at the time he was born) , he still would have been a natural born citizen according to 8 U.S.C. § 1409.c, because she was both a citizen and had resided in the US for at least one year.

        Rights are rarely absolute, or nearly as cut and dry as people claim. For instance, the freedom of the press has been interpreted to not include material that is obscene. Freedom of peaceable assembly requires that you pay a fee and get a permit. The right to keep and bear arms has been determined to not include things like buying surface-to-air missiles from Victor Bout. Up until Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), despite the 6th amendment saying that you have the right to “have the Assistance of Counsel for [your] defence [sic]”, indigent suspects were not provided with an attorney (…and what use is and enumerated right if you lack the ability to exercise the right?). Under fairly recent court rulings, you must explicitly invoke your 5th amendment right to remain silent; simply being silent is insufficient.

        Do I think that Trump is going to be able to revoke the citizenship of people that were born here to undocumented immigrants? No. Do I want him to? Also no. Do I want to see his mass deportations blow up in his face and implode the economy? Oh yeah, definitely. I want people–Trump MAGAts–to see just how much we rely on the underpaid labor of the undocumented people in this country for the necessities of life.

        • DeadWorldWalking@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          What you fail to understand is you acting like this right is revokable manufacturers consent for revoking rights.

          If you were smart you wouldn’t play devil’s advocate, you wouldn’t help the devil